Site Mobile Navigation

Christie’s Silence Spurs Worry for Train Tunnel

In his first several months as New Jersey’s governor, Chris Christie made it clear that he intended to cut the state’s budget in ways that might surprise and upset some residents. But one big project — a train tunnel to Manhattan projected to cost $8.7 billion — appeared safe.

The tunnel, planned for about 20 years, had already received pledges of $3 billion each from the federal government and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, and ground had been broken to start the digging. But this week, elected officials and mass transportation advocates have been buzzing with rumors that Mr. Christie is about to withdraw the state funds that had already been committed.

To do so would effectively scuttle the biggest transit project under way in the country, forfeiting the federal money and 6,000 construction jobs.

Mr. Christie has not yet announced whether he will back out of the agreement to build the tunnel. On Wednesday afternoon, he said he would decide “really soon,” adding, “We don’t want to hold you in suspense for much longer.”

Other officials were clearly concerned that a temporary halt to spending on the tunnel, which Mr. Christie ordered in early September, citing concerns of large cost overruns, would soon become permanent.

President Obama’s transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, was trying Wednesday to arrange a talk with the governor. Meanwhile, New Jersey’s senior senator, Frank R. Lautenberg, was imploring Port Authority officials to accept responsibility for any cost overruns.

The frenzy has kept a spotlight on Mr. Christie, whose trip this week to campaign for other Republicans in the Midwest continued to fan speculation that he has his sights on the White House. Mr. Christie has already drawn national attention for the combative stance he has taken with teachers’ unions, cutting state education funding and suggesting that teachers ease the impact by giving part of their pay to local school districts.

Now, he is demonstrating his willingness to reconsider the decisions of his predecessors, no matter the cost. The review of the tunnel’s price tag that Mr. Christie ordered last month was scheduled to be completed by this weekend, but some advocates for the project have concluded that his mind was already made up. Some said they thought he intended to pull back financing for the tunnel to solve a more pressing problem: the lack of money available to fix up the state’s road and bridges.

The state’s Transportation Trust Fund, which is financed by the state’s tax on gasoline, is running dry. Transit advocates and environmental groups argue that the simple solution is to raise the gas tax, the first increase since the late 1980s. They point out that the state’s taxes on gas amount to just 14.5 cents a gallon — lower than in all but three other states — and that every extra penny would translate to another $50 million annually.

But Mr. Christie, who had pledged not to raise any taxes, has steadfastly refused to consider that option, leaving the state’s transportation commissioner, James Simpson, with few options to replenish the transportation fund.

Mr. Christie said Wednesday that he expected to hear Mr. Simpson’s plan for the transportation fund in a couple of weeks. By then, he should have decided whether to keep the state’s pledge to spend about $1.25 billion in highway tolls on the commuter-train tunnel.

The tunnel, which was scheduled to be completed in 2017, was designed to double the capacity for passengers traveling between Manhattan and New Jersey. Its planners have said that it would create 6,000 construction jobs, reduce congestion and pollution and spur $660 million in annual economic activity in the metropolitan area. Without it, they said, the region must rely on a century-old, two-track tunnel from New Jersey to Pennsylvania Station in New York that is already nearing capacity.

The project had been supported by business leaders and elected officials in New York and New Jersey, including some Republicans, like Representative Rodney Frelinghuysen, who lists the tunnel as one of his “key mass transportation initiatives.” Though the project has been lauded as an exceptional example of bipartisan cooperation, no Republicans have spoken out against the prospect of its suspension or demise.

On Wednesday, Mr. Frelinghuysen said in a statement that he supported Mr. Christie’s reconsideration. “We need to answer some key questions such as, ‘Can we afford this project?’ and ‘Does it make sense?’ ” Mr. Frelinghuysen said.

That sort of talk frightened mass transportation advocates, who said that if the tunnel project was halted, it might not be revived for a decade or more. Robert D. Yaro, the president of the Regional Plan Association, pointed to the Second Avenue subway as an analogue. After that project was stopped in the 1970s, because the Metropolitan Transportation Authority was in dire financial straits, it did not begin again for more than a quarter-century, Mr. Yaro said.

“If he pulls the plug on this thing, I think it could be gone for another generation,” Mr. Yaro said, referring to Mr. Christie.

Mr. Yaro said it was uncertain whether Mr. Christie would be able to use elsewhere the $3 billion that has been pledged by the Port Authority, which is jointly controlled by the governors of the two states.

“He’ll have to cut a deal with the next governor of New York to do that,” he said, “and I suspect that Andrew Cuomo or Carl Paladino would have some other ideas on how to spend that money.”

Nate Schweber contributed reporting.

A version of this article appears in print on October 7, 2010, on page A30 of the New York edition with the headline: Officials Fear Christie Will Kill Construction of Hudson River Tunnel. Order Reprints|Today's Paper|Subscribe